Brandon Donnelly — Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly. — Page 104

I was just reading about Simple Ventures. They are a Toronto-based venture builder that has raised $15 million to help create 25 high-growth companies headquartered in Canada by 2030. Some of their investors include TD Innovation Partners, Sun Life, Sobeys, and Harley Finkelstein (President of Shopify).

Now, I'm not a venture capital expert, but this seems to me like a relatively small amount. (They plan to raise another $5 million by the end of the year.) So I would encourage more institutions and rich people to step up with their wallets, because you have to applaud their mission :

“We are coming together to issue a call to action - bring Canadian talent home,” said Rachel Zimmer, exited founder and Co-Founder and CEO of Simple Ventures. “This funding will allow us to build great Canadian Headquartered companies. Now is a crucial time to join our mission to put fire in the Canadian engine.”

Canada still has 100,000 fewer entrepreneurs than it did 20 years ago, despite the population increasing by over 10 million during the same period. At the same time, nearly one-third of Canadian immigrant entrepreneurs move to the U.S., citing limited support for scaling businesses at home. Simple Ventures tackles this problem by sourcing new company ideas, validating them, and pairing them with Canadian leaders to co-create ventures.

There's absolutely no shortage of smart, ambitious, and entrepreneurial Canadians. Where we need to improve is in commercializing and scaling our ideas. And it's crucial we do this as quickly as possible because there are powerful compounding benefits to entrepreneurship.

When a new company scales, it creates jobs, wealth, and knowledge. These ingredients can, and usually are, used to start a growing subset of even bigger companies. Venture capitalist Fred Wilson once referred to this as The Darwinian Evolution of Startup Hubs .

If you study Silicon Valley, what you see is something that looks like a forest where trees grow tall, produce seeds that drop and start new trees, and eventually the older trees mature and stop growing or worse, die of disease and rot, but the new trees grow up even taller and stronger.

If you drill down a bit deeper, you see that the founders, investors and early employees generate a tremendous amount of wealth from these big successes. The later employees don't make as much wealth but they do learn a ton and make enough money that they don't need to work for someone else and so they strike out on their own and are often funded by the folks who made the big money in the prior startup. That's how the seed drops from the tree and starts a new tree growing. This continues on and on and on.

When you think of startups and entrepreneurship in this way, you start to see just how important it is for us to keep growing our forests, instead of chopping down our trees and shipping them to the US. This is an exercise in city and nation building. And so I wish the team at Simple Ventures nothing but success.

LFG, Canada. If you're working on something and would like to pitch SV, click here .

I'm excited to learn that the University of Pennsylvania Stuart Weitzman School of Design has just launched a new master's program that is intended to fill the gap in education between design and real estate development. It's called the Master of Science in Design with a concentration in Property Development and Design (or MSD-PDD).

From the sounds of it, it's an expansion of the certificate program in real estate development that I did while I was there. Good. It's also something that I've been advocating for at the University of Toronto for over a decade. We need more bilingual city-building professionals who understand both design and real estate development.

My initial comment is that I hope they're really drawing on and leveraging the resources of the Wharton School . That's what will really make this program stand out against many similar programs. When I was there, I remember them having two different real estate finance classes: one for MBAs and one for designers (which had been made deliberately easier).

I thought this was bullshit, so I met with the program coordinator and requested to be admitted to the MBA one. He strongly advised against it and said that it's, you know, really hard. But that only made me want to take it even more. I ended up getting an A.

So my piece of unsolicited advice for this nascent program is: don't baby the designers when it comes to business and finance. Because the market certainly won't.

View post on X →

Bianca and I went for a walk around the Junction over the weekend, as we like to do, and I was pleasantly surprised to find a number of "multiplexes" under construction. That is, small infill rental projects with four or five homes, sometimes including a laneway house at the back. (Sorry, no sixplexes were spotted just yet.) It immediately made me think, "Wow, it's happening! Toronto is intensifying its neighborhoods."

For those of you who haven't been following closely, many of Toronto's neighborhoods have been bleeding population over the past few decades. It's only where we've allowed larger-scale new developments that we've really seen populations increase. That's what has precipitated our current push to expand housing options in our low-rise neighborhoods. And already, you can find evidence that it's starting to work.

That said, it's worth mentioning a few things. Some of the planning notice signs that I stumbled upon dated back to 2022, and some were current. This raises at least two lines of questions. One, why is a small project that went to the Committee of Adjustment in 2022 still under construction? Was it because of planning delays, or something else? And two, why are today's projects still having to go to the CofA? Are we still not there yet in terms of the planning policies?

I don't know the precise answers to these questions, but I do know that planning staff actively monitor which variances are requested and ultimately approved. If the same variance continues to show up, then it's a clear indication that it should just become policy, and not be something that needs to be sought. This should give some comfort that we should only get better at facilitating this scale of housing.